Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (44911)	1/25/2006 3:18:40 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) of 90947

I take it that you believe in the rule of law. I take it that you accept that Constitutional law prescribes and proscribes conduct for the state--as well as for groups or individuals. Therefore, the use of force is not capricious, but is regulated in accordance with the rules of law--in this case, the laws of the United States of America. We were discussing the strictures upon the use of “deadly force”. You assert (mistakenly) that the State has no such limitation upon the use of deadly force. Even though legal history, case law, and academic theory plainly identify the legal and moral limitations pertinent to the exercise of both civilian and state force--still you pretend that “deadly force” is some a priori Hobbesian right wielded by the State. But you are wrong. Every encyclopedia says you are wrong. The Supreme Court says you are wrong. The Constitution says you are wrong. The common awareness of the illiterate and the helpless says you are wrong. Not only are you wrong--but you are intentionally wrong--IMO. It is a FACT that “deadly force” is a right that must be exercised with the most extreme care. It is permitted and justified ONLY in defense of extreme threat of harm or death. To claim that it is a lawful response to tax evasion is plainly foolish. The law makes it clear (as clear as the law can make something clear) that “deadly force” is a remedy of last resort --and may only be used against one who threatens life. Civilians may legally use deadly force--and so may employees of the State (hired and responsible to “WE THE PEOPLE" for those unclear on the concept). I remarked several posts ago that deadly force was not a legitimate recourse of the State in matters of Tax Evasion. The statement is too too obvious to even require an explanation. But SI is a really strange place. So I have posted encyclopedia links and stated the obvious in myriad other ways. Under Constitutional and case law of the U.S. , “deadly force” is CRIMINAL beyond very narrow and defined boundaries. It is NOT “carte blanche” hunting season for the State. "but any attempt at enforcement has deadly force behind it" Get real. The U.S. operates under Constitutional rule of law. Deadly force is criminal unless in response to a threat to life. Evading Income taxes will not justify "deadly force". Any civilian or Federal employee or police officer using deadly force would risk being charged with murder or a similar offense. But if you resist arrest and refuse to drop your offensive weapon (for instance)...THAT OFFENSE might well justify deadly force. But if a cop shoots you for spitting on the sidewalk (or falsifying a tax return) HE/SHE will be on death row. The RULE OF LAW determines the legitimacy of "Deadly Force".

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next